On 01/20/2012 10:30 AM, Noel Power wrote:
On 20/01/12 13:40, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
On 01/20/2012 06:32 AM, Noel Power wrote:
note there is a mistake in the table below
[*] table of behaviour in vba, pre the bug being introduced and post
patch
mso old behaviour present
--------------------------------
date + num Date Date Date
date - num Date Double Date
date * num Double Double Double
date / num Double Double Double
date + date Date Double Double [1]
should read
date / num Double Date Double
^^^^
e.g.
mso old behaviour present
--------------------------------
date + num Date Date Date
date - num Date Double Date
date * num Double Double Double
date / num Double Double Double
date + date Date Date Double [1]
date - date Double Double Double
date * date Double Double Double
in other words other than the date - num example the 'old' the old and
new behaviour *should* match
The only thing with which I disagree is that I would have addition
and subtraction return the same types. So, I would say that if date +
date returns a date (as your chart shows for MSO) then I would have
date - date return a date as well. If not, then I would leave your
original change as is so that they are consistent for addition and
subtraction.
I would prefer to preserve compatibility ( especially for (+/-) ) as
these are afaics the only operators that really make sense. I have a
patch to do that that I would like to commit to master
What type is "-date"? I see that never returned a date so (date +
(-date)) will return a date.
no idea, it shouldn't be any different then it was before though
Noel
I believe that you intend to cause the following behavior:
date + num Date
date - num Date
date * num Double
date / num Double
date + date Date [2]
date - date Double [3]
date * date Double
[2] - I prefer this, but I would not spend much energy advocating it.
[3] - I would have subtraction return the same type as addition. So, if
"date + date" returns "date", then I would return date for [3]. If you
have [2] return a double, then have [3] return a double.
My opinion is that you now just pick one and do it. I will call it a
consensus and back your decision in the unlikely event I am ever called
upon to do so.
--
Andrew Pitonyak
My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt
Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php
Context
- Re: [Libreoffice] [REVIEW][3-4] date change regression fdo#44385 (continued)
Re: [Libreoffice] [REVIEW][3-4] date change regression fdo#44385 · Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.